W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-dom@w3.org > January to March 1999

Re: DOM2 event comments

From: Tom Pixley <joki@netscape.com>
Date: Mon, 01 Mar 1999 14:57:42 -0800
Message-ID: <36DB1B66.A3746ACD@netscape.com>
To: "'www-dom@w3.org'" <www-dom@w3.org>
CC: John Lemire <jlemire@microsoft.com>
John Lemire wrote:
> 
> 2) I like how you are enforcing tag/style/programmatic registration to
> coexist. I would also like to see you specify that events that can be added
> via one mechanism can be added via the others. There are examples in IE
> where inline event specifying:
> <tag id="abc" onxxx="xxhandler( );">....</tag>
> doesn't work but
> <script for="abc" event="xxx">
> ...
> </script>
> does. This really sucks big and should be purged...

The only mechanism for event handler registration that we're specifying
in the spec is the programmatic model.  We also are tasked with ensuring
the new model will coexist with the existing HTML 4.0 model. If other
methods of specifying event handlers exist they can certainly be made to
work with the DOM event model but we don't explicitly support them.

> 3) I would like to see an events attribute modeled after the style attribute
> ala
> <tag id="xyz" style="border: solid; background-color: red;"
> events="mouseover: onMouseOver( ); mouseout: onMouseOut( ); click: onClick(
> );">
> so that all events including non-DOM defined ones could pass validation as
> well as well-formed-ness.
> validation has this problem today with "expando" tag attributes which are
> handy for HTML authors who aren't script savy and some sort of "expando"
> attribute would have nicely solved this. Feel free to add this too ubt
> certainly make sure events don't suffer similarly...

This is really more a change to HTML than it is to the DOM.  As such,
its kind of outside of our scope.  I too would like to see a better
mechanism for event handler registration inside of the HTML tag syntax. 
I have seen proposals similar to the one you suggest and I think that's
probably the right direction.  However, the HTML working group is the
one which much accept the proposal.

> thanks
> johnl

	-tom
Received on Monday, 1 March 1999 17:57:37 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 22 June 2012 06:13:46 GMT